MAHADEV MALLAPPA ATAR,BELAGAVI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1, BELAGAVI

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 014/Pan/2024 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Mahadev Mallappa Atar Pwd Contractor, Katkol, Ramdurg, Dist. Balgavi-591114 Pan:Abxpa7467P . . . . . . . Appellant

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [for short ‘the Act’] by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [for short ‘Ld. NFAC’] which ascended out of order of assessment passed u/s 143(3) of the Act for assessment year 2013-14 [for short ‘AY’] is challenged by the assessee u/s 253(1) of the Act. ITAT-Panaji Page

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI vs. M/S POTDAR BROTHERS, BELAGAVI

Appeals of the Revenue are PARTLY ALLOWED for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

disallow only 30% of such labour charges paid to karigars/artisans as excessive. Au contraire, in first appellate proceedings, these additions were deleted in tandem for all the years without vouching key evidences & merits of the cases but by outdoing the provisions of rule 46A (supra) and section 250

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI vs. M/S POTDAR BROTHERS, BELAGAVI

Appeals of the Revenue are PARTLY ALLOWED for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

disallow only 30% of such labour charges paid to karigars/artisans as excessive. Au contraire, in first appellate proceedings, these additions were deleted in tandem for all the years without vouching key evidences & merits of the cases but by outdoing the provisions of rule 46A (supra) and section 250

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI vs. M/S POTDAR BROTHERS, BELAGAVI

Appeals of the Revenue are PARTLY ALLOWED for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

disallow only 30% of such labour charges paid to karigars/artisans as excessive. Au contraire, in first appellate proceedings, these additions were deleted in tandem for all the years without vouching key evidences & merits of the cases but by outdoing the provisions of rule 46A (supra) and section 250

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI vs. M/S POTDAR BROTHERS, BELAGAVI

Appeals of the Revenue are PARTLY ALLOWED for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

disallow only 30% of such labour charges paid to karigars/artisans as excessive. Au contraire, in first appellate proceedings, these additions were deleted in tandem for all the years without vouching key evidences & merits of the cases but by outdoing the provisions of rule 46A (supra) and section 250

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI vs. M/S POTDAR BROTHERS, BELAGAVI

Appeals of the Revenue are PARTLY ALLOWED for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

disallow only 30% of such labour charges paid to karigars/artisans as excessive. Au contraire, in first appellate proceedings, these additions were deleted in tandem for all the years without vouching key evidences & merits of the cases but by outdoing the provisions of rule 46A (supra) and section 250

MRS VINI P. KENI,PANAJI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(3), PANAJI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos. 112/Pan/2022 (A.Y. 2014-15 ) Vini Prasad Keni, Vs Ito-Ward-1(3), Keni Building, Aayakar Bhavan, . Dr.Dada Vaidhya Road, Panaji-403001, Panjim-403001, Goa. Goa. . Pan .No. Adppk9767N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By Shri D.E.Robinson.Ar Revenue By Sri Narender Reddy.Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 25.02.2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 20.03.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assesse Against The Order Of Nfac/ Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, The Ld.Ar Of The Assessee Submitted That There Is A Delay Of 13 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Hon’Ble Tribunal & The Assesse Has Filed The Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay. Whereas, The Facts Mentioned In The Affidavit Are Reasonable & The Ld. Dr Has No Specific Objections. Accordingly, We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal. The Assessee Has Raised

250 of the Act. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that there is a delay of 13 days in filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal and the assesse has filed the affidavit for condonation of delay. Whereas, the facts mentioned in the affidavit are reasonable and the Ld. DR has no specific

SHRI BASAVESHWAR PRATHAMIK KRISHI PATTIN SAHAKARI SANGHA N SUNADHOLI,SUNADHOLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GOKAK

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 030/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Shri Basaveshwar Prathamik Krishi Pattin Sahakari Sangha At Post: Sundholi, Ta.: Sundholi Dist. Belagavi.-591310 Pan : Aahas0468A . . . . . . . Appellant

250 of the Income- tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] which in turn arisen out of order of intimation processed dt. 22/10/2019 passed u/s 143(1) of the Act by the Central Processing Centre, Bengaluru [‘Ld. CPC’ hereinafter] anent to assessment year 2018-19 [‘AY’ hereinafter]. ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 10 Shri Basaveshwar Prathamik Krishi Pattin Sahakari Sangha

ALLAMAPRABHU VUSS NI, KALLOLI,KALLOLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, GOKAK

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 063/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Allamaprabhu Vuss Niyamit Kalloli 09, Allamaprabhu Vuss Niyamit Kalloli, Kalloli So Dist. Belagavi. Pan : Aafaa8818E . . . . . . . Appellant

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] which in turn arisen out of order of intimation processed dt. 25/06/2019 passed u/s 143(1) of the Act by the Central Processing Centre, Bengaluru [‘Ld. CPC’ hereinafter] anent to assessment year 2018-19 [‘AY’ hereinafter]. ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 11 Allamaprabhu VUSS Niyamit Kalloli Vs ITO, Gokak

SONALI MAHENDRA NAIK GAUNEKAR,PANAJI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1), PANAJI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

250 of the Act which in turn originated from order of assessment dt. 27/03/2025 passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 263 of the Act by Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Panaji, Goa [‘Ld. AO’]. ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 13 Sonali Mahendra Naik Gaunekar Vs ITO ITA No.: 313/PAN/2025 AY: 2016-17 2. We note that, the assessee individual filed

THE OMKAR URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, BELAGAVI

The appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali(Through Virtual Hearing From Pune) आयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 84/Pan/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 The Omkar Urban Co-Op. Cr. Society Ltd. A/P. : Kangral (Bk.), Belagavi. Pan: Aaaat3508P . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

disallowed the deduction claimed under section 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Income Tax Act, despite Appellant being Cooperative Credit society. 7. The appellant craves leave to add and or alter any of the ground of appeal before or at the time of hearing. 3. After hearing to rival contentions; subject to provisions of rule 18 of Income Tax Appellate

PRIYADARSHANI MAHILA CO-OP CR. SOCIETY LTD,BELAGAVI vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 032/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2019-20 Priyadarshani Mahila Co-Op. Society Ltd. At Post: Kognoli, Ta.: Nippani Dist. Belagavi. Pan : Aabap2582L . . . . . . . Appellant

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] which in turn arisen out of order of intimation processed dt. 16/04/2020 passed u/s 143(1) of the Act by the Central Processing Centre, Bengaluru [‘Ld. CPC’ hereinafter] anent to assessment year 2019-20 [‘AY’ hereinafter]. ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 12 Priyadarshani Mahila Co-op. Society Ltd. Vs DCIT

KABBUR POORVA BHAG VIVIDODDHESHA PRATHAMIK GRAMEEN KRUSHI S SANGH NI, KABBUR,KABBUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, NIPANI

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 304/Pan/2024 Assessment Year : 2018-19 The Kabbur Purvbhag Prathamik Krushi Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit At Post: Kabbur, Tal.:Chikodi, Dist.:Belgaum. Pan : Aadat9192J . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Nippani. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : None Revenue By : Mr S Manikandan [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 04/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/03/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Assessee Is In Appeal Against Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1069069880(1) Dt. 25/09/2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereafter] By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac’ Hereafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 10/03/2021 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By The National Faceless E-Asstt. Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereafter] For Assessment Year 2018-19 [‘Ay’ Hereafter].

disallowance of 80P(2) travelled in first appeal, the Ld. NFAC considered the material placed before him and without conclusively adjudicating it u/s 251 of the Act, re-directed the same to the Ld. AO vide para 6.2.3 placed on pg 16 of the order. We are heedful to the restriction placed by clause (a) of sub- 7. section

M/S CHOWGULE AND COMPANY (SALT) PVT. LTD,MORMUGAO vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, MARGAO

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of aforesaid observation

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D. Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. : 390/Pan/2017 करधििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013 M/S Chowgule & Company (Salt) Pvt Ltd., Chowgule House, Mormugao Harbour, Goa – 403803. Pan: Aabcc 5595 J . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिाम / V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Margao, Goa. . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Ms Hiral Sejpal Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 24/02/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/04/2022 आदेश / Order Per Jamlappa D Battull Am; The Present Appeal Filed By The Appellant Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax- Appeals, Panaji-1 [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 09/10/2017 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which In Turn Tousled Out Of Order Of Assessment Of Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-Circle-2, Margoa [For Short “Ao”] Dt. 27/07/2014 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act, For The Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2012-2013. Itat-Panaji Page 1 Of 23

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [for short “the Act”], which in turn tousled out of order of assessment of Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-Circle-2, Margoa [for short “AO”] dt. 27/07/2014 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act, for the assessment year [for short “AY”] 2012-2013. ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 23 M/s Chowgule and Company

M/S VEERASHAIVA CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI LIMITED,ATHANI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -2(2), BELGAVI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

250(6). 2. All the appeals are related disallowance of deduction u/s 80P for the sake of brevity, we are taking all the matters together. Related to matters in ITA No. 244/PAN/2018 is delayed by 7 days and ITA Nos. 248 & 249/PAN/2018 are delayed by 38 days. The assessees prayed for condonation of delay. In all the three appeals delay

HEGDEKATTA GROUP GRAMAGALA SEVA SAHAKARI SANGHA LTD.,SIRSI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1,, SIRSI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

250(6). 2. All the appeals are related disallowance of deduction u/s 80P for the sake of brevity, we are taking all the matters together. Related to matters in ITA No. 244/PAN/2018 is delayed by 7 days and ITA Nos. 248 & 249/PAN/2018 are delayed by 38 days. The assessees prayed for condonation of delay. In all the three appeals delay

M/S NERALI URBAN CO-OPRATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,NERALI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(2), BELAGAVI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

250(6). 2. All the appeals are related disallowance of deduction u/s 80P for the sake of brevity, we are taking all the matters together. Related to matters in ITA No. 244/PAN/2018 is delayed by 7 days and ITA Nos. 248 & 249/PAN/2018 are delayed by 38 days. The assessees prayed for condonation of delay. In all the three appeals delay

THE BELGAUM MANUFACTURERS CO-OPERATIVE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE LTD,BELGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1), BELGAVI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

250(6). 2. All the appeals are related disallowance of deduction u/s 80P for the sake of brevity, we are taking all the matters together. Related to matters in ITA No. 244/PAN/2018 is delayed by 7 days and ITA Nos. 248 & 249/PAN/2018 are delayed by 38 days. The assessees prayed for condonation of delay. In all the three appeals delay

SHRI. GOMATESH CO-OPP. CREDIT SOC. LTD.,BELGAUM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 1, NIPANI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

250(6). 2. All the appeals are related disallowance of deduction u/s 80P for the sake of brevity, we are taking all the matters together. Related to matters in ITA No. 244/PAN/2018 is delayed by 7 days and ITA Nos. 248 & 249/PAN/2018 are delayed by 38 days. The assessees prayed for condonation of delay. In all the three appeals delay